2021年1月23日发(作者：耸立)
1.

科学研究不能仅因为已发表，就认为它是完美的。它们的不足也不是微小到只有 专业人
员才能发现。任何从事科研的学生都能，而且确实应该能够，批判性地阅读科学文献。
这 意味着你读一篇诺贝尔奖获得者的文章都能在其中发现不足。
它实际上期望作为科学
工作者的你 能对任何学科进行分析评论。
你分析评论的水平会因你的经验水平而有差异，
但你应该至少能够 像一名相对无经验的本科生来分析科学文献。


Just because a scientific study has been published, this does not mean it is perfect. And the
imperfections are not so minute that a non-expert cannot find them. Any student of science
can, and indeed should, read science critically. This means you can read a paper by a Nobel
laureate and
find
fault
with
it.
It
is
in
fact
expected
that,
as
a
practicing
scientist,
you
can
criticize any science. The level of your critical analysis will differ with your experience level,
but you should be able to criticize science even as a relatively inexperienced undergraduate.



2.

简单地说，
他们是否回答了他们的问题？他们是否作了正确的实验来说明他们的问题？
如果你列出的实验目 录与他们的不同，他们的实验体系是否更好？有时并不是！如果你
不得不回答这些问题，了解所有目前你 所知道的，你会怎样作？可能会借鉴他们的实验？
或与他们做的一模一样？精彩的研究论文的实验恰到好 处，这样的文章是不多的。


Simply put, did they answer their question? Did they do the right experiments to
address their question? If your list of experiments differs from theirs, is their line
of experimentation better? Sometimes it isn’t! If you had to answer this research
question, knowing all that you know now, how would you do it? Maybe borrow
some of their experiments? Or do exactly what they did? Great papers are those
that do it exactly right, and they are rare.

3.

早期的人类仅仅使用了非常有限数 量的材料，
比如自然的石头、
木头、
粘土、
兽皮等等。
随着时间的发 展，通过使用技术来生产获得的材料比自然的材料具有更加优秀的性能。
这些性材料包括了陶瓷以及各种 各样的金属，
而且他们还发现通过添加其他物质和改变
加热温度可以改变材料的性能。此时，材 料的应用完全就是一个选择的过程，且此过程
又是根据材料的性质从许多的而不是有限的材料中选择一种 最适于某种用途的材料
.

The earliest humans had access to only a very limited number of materials, those
that
occur
naturally:
stone,
wood,
clay,
skins,
and
so
on.
With
time
they
discovered techniques for producing materials that had properties superior to those
of
the
natural
ones;
these
new
materials
included
pottery
and
various
metals.
Furthermore, it was discovered that the properties of a material could be altered by
heat
treatments
and
by
the
addition
of
other
substances.
At
this
point,
materials
utilization
was
totally
a
selection
process
that
involved
deciding
from
a
given,
rather limited set of materials the one best suited for an application by virtue of its
characteristics.


4.

有时这个工艺使得占主导地位的材料和辅助的材料必须是兼容的。这是一个
配合。
兼容性不容易 找到，
很多失败的匹配和材料的失效都可能是灾难性的，
伴随着责任和赔偿问题。这听起来像食 品律师，有时候是：一些专家，在法
庭材料失败的案件中作为专家证人。但我们在此的目的不是争辩，而 是让大
家对材料世界（因为即使是在遥远的外星球你也能发现相同的元素）和加工
领域有一个了 解，而且提供选择材料的方法和工具，以确保材料性能能长期
友好地结合起来。


Sometimes it is the process that is the dominant partner and a material-mate must
be
found
that
is
compatible
with
it.
It
is
a
marriage.
Compatibility
is
not
easily
found
—
many marriages fail and material failure can be catastrophic, with issues
of liability and compensation. This sounds like food for lawyers, and sometimes it
is: some specialists make their living as expert witnesses in court cases involving
failed
materials.
But
our
aim
here
is
not
contention;
rather,
it
is
to
give
you
a
vision of the materials universe (since, even on the remotest planets you will find
the same elements) and of the universe of processes, and to provide methods and
tools for choosing them to ensure a happy, durable union.


1.

Read the text of the results without critiquing the data. Go slowly and carefully
here. Since this is your first pass through the data, do not try to take it all in at
once. Again, look for specific information and ignore the rest. This time, you are
looking for a good understanding of what the experiments were: what did they
do? The goal here is to get into the minds of the authors: Let them tell you why
they
did
the
experiments,
and
what
they
think
happened
as
a
result.
Assume
everything they tell you is the absolute truth. This is where you compare your list
with theirs. Write down what differences there are, and note why you think the
lists are different: are the authors leaving things out you’d like to see, or are they
on a different track than you? The key here is to fully understand their train of
thought. If you can’t figure it out, write
that down, too, specifying exactly where
you
fell
off
the
train.
Then
move
on.
From
here
on,
focus
on
the
material
you
understand from the Results, and ignore what you don’t understand. BE CRITICAL:
Assume they are trying to pull a fast one on you. Make sure that when they say
something, the data actually show it.

阅读正文的结果部分，不评价数据。这里要慢点，仔细点。既然这是你第一次浏览数据，不
要试图一次 就全盘拿下。
应再次寻找特殊的信息并忽略其它的。
这次你要寻找的是透彻地理